Skip to main content

About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
. the first thing is we were in the middle of an election campaign, and candidate bill clinton was comparing beijing to baghdad. and this was right at the time when china was moving from baghdad to paris. maybe i'm overstating the case a little bit, but that's essentially what was happening. i mean, this was a dramatic shift in china, and the u.s. government paid absolutely no attention to it. it had no impact on the policies of the clinton administration when it took office. and, of course, since i was the american ambassador to china this confronted me with problems with an american government that had one view of china, that china was already moving in a different direction, and that created some contradictions in trying to carry out my instructions faithfully. but i think this time, you have something that goes of that. clearly are the bush eli a fair has exposed that china's political system is not different from others. leaders struggle for power. they have their own ambitions. some succeed, some come crashing down, as in the case of bush eli. so we shouldn't assume that just because c
or became. um, the big issue, the big change began in 1980, of course, with the election of ronald reagan because ronald reagan brought with him to washington, um, a very underrated figure in recent american history, someone who i don't think gets his due as an important person, and that's edwin meese. because edwin meese at first as an adviser and then as attorney general said, look, there has been a liberal ayen da at the supreme court -- agenda at the supreme court, there needs to be a conservative agenda at the supreme court. what was that agenda? expand executive power, end racial preferences intended to assist african-americans, speed up execution, welcome religion into the public sphere and, above all, um, reverse roe v. wade and allow states once again to ban abortion. a big part of the reagan revolution, um, was the arrival in washington of a group of young and committed conservative lawyers who wanted to work in that, on behalf of that agenda. who were two of the best and brightest of that group? john roberts and samuel alito. 197 finish -- in 1985 in a memo plotting litigation
to the scene in phoenix in 1960's during the election when william rehnquist was interviewing with voters and brosnahan said look -- he was a very well-known and respected lawyer by thin in san francisco and brosnahan said i was there and i was the fbi agent on the scene. i positively identify him as the man. discouraging black voters. rehnquist was giving them a literacy test and which was not illegal but it was, but he was really pushing the line to the point where the police and the fbi had to be called to restore order. and rehnquist simply said, that was not made. >> host: kind of a case of mistaken identity so james brosnahan comes to washington and puts a lot on the line. >> guest: puts a lot on the line and really just kind it gets hammered because in the end he is not left with anything that really he can grab onto to come back at rehnquist. rehnquist simply says i just can't explain it. it's just not me and that was very i thought, very typical i think of when i met with rehnquist's 10 years later. very very typical of the way that he carried a question that he did not want to a
in the 1960s during the election when william rehnquist was interfering with voters. and brosnahan said, look, he was a very well known and respected lawyer by then in san francisco. and buzz han said, i was there, i was the fbi agent on the -- >> host: who was discouraging black voters. >> guest: rehnquist was giving them a literacy test. >> host: right. >> guest: and, um, which was not illegal, but it was -- but he was really pushing the line to the point where the police and the fbi had to be called to restore order. and rehnquist simply said, that not me. >> host: kind of a mistaken identity. >> guest: case of mistaken identity. >> host: so james brosnahan comes to washington, puts a lot on the line -- >> guest: puts a lot on the line and really gets hammered because in the end he's not left with anything that really he can grab onto to come back at rehnquist. rehnquist simply says i just can't explain it, t just not me -- it's just not me. and that was very, very, i thought, cagey. it was very typical, i thought, when i met with rehnquist ten years later, um, very, very typical of the wa
the president and i will of course vote for him in the election with a lifelong democrat i still remember her weeping denied roosevelt died. my mother just passed away from planning that hillary wasn't liberal enough. if i had voted for republican coming back from the grave and scold me like pineapple was. but i am disappointed that the president hasn't taken stronger steps to rid us of this mania of testing which ever since no child left behind has come into law is the kind of national psychosis, but there's something psychotic about it. it can't be numbered. it doesn't count. my father's psychiatrist use to take me to the back boards of mental hospitals in massachusetts and so many people on the most severe depression the only way they could ease their discomfort is by numbering everything. they would restlessly move object surrounded the table to get them in the pattern, and as i mentioned, some of the bureaucrats in washington maybe they would enjoy este in the recovery house to get over this numerical what action. this hoping of judging children and their teachers primarily on the basis
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)